Trelliz wrote:All football games are boring and terrible, as are 3d platformers. Now what?

Sure you can say that you don't like them, that is your opinion and I'm fine with that.

Where some people seem to go wrong is if they state still one of their opinions, categorically about a specific game and expect that to be unchallenged because its 'their opinion'. For example 'Sensible Soccer is gooseberry fool', obviously still someone's opinion, however also obviously wrong.

Can opinions be wrong? Yes. Of course they can. You can't hide behind 'its just my opinion' every single time you say something.

Opinions can't be obviously right or wrong because they are subjective interpretations of events or things which cannot be empirically tested. You can disagree with an opinion, however saying someone is 'obviously wrong' for disagreeing with you is next-level "stop not liking what I like", literal child mentality. I'm not sure if this is some elaborate long-con troll so if so well done for baiting me into replying.

Trelliz wrote:Opinions can't be obviously right or wrong because they are subjective interpretations of events or things which cannot be empirically tested. You can disagree with an opinion, however saying someone is 'obviously wrong' for disagreeing with you is next-level "stop not liking what I like", literal child mentality. I'm not sure if this is some elaborate long-con troll so if so well done for baiting me into replying.

It just isn't that black and white.

There are a couple of ways to look at it, either you could say that there are levels of minority opinion that are so slim, so much against the norm, that they stray into the territory of being almost insane and therefore are just wrong. Or you could say that some of what some people think are subjective opinions are actually not and you can actually empirically test them in ways that make opinions about those thing actually not opinions at all.

I think for something like a video game there actually are things that are definitely empirically testable that go into the makeup of those games.

So you can say that you don't like a game and that be fine because there are obviously subjective parts that you might not enjoy.

However there are empirical things about it which either work and are 'good' or don't and are 'bad', we might lack the vocabulary or knowledge (or will) to pin down all of these pieces and talk about them each in depth, but it doesn't mean they don't exist.

I would argue that to say a game is 'a super pile of gooseberry fool' the empirical part of the game, would actually have to be bad. In this case it isn't and so the 'opinion' is wrong.

It also doesn't hurt my case that as far as I'm aware that particular point of view is an extreme minority.

Hugo you cant have an opinion, tell the other person theirs is gooseberry fool and not expect to have yours criticised.

FWIW pro evo for me is better than SWOS, just because it is. But its Pro Evo 3 for me. Dem memories.

There is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, and it lies between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge. This is the dimension of imagination. It is an area which we call

Glowy69 wrote:Hugo you cant have an opinion, tell the other person theirs is gooseberry fool and not expect to have yours criticised.

FWIW pro evo for me is better than SWOS, just because it is. But its Pro Evo 3 for me. Dem memories.

It totally depends on what the other opinion is.

I have no problem with you thinking Pro Evo is better than SWOS, its not the same thing as saying either game is gooseberry fool. Like I said some things are ok to just leave as people's opinion, other things most certainly are not.

What gets me are the people who think pretty much anything is a valid opinion and you can't say anything against that because its someone's opinion. That's just nonsense.

HSH28 wrote:I have no problem with you thinking Pro Evo is better than SWOS, its not the same thing as saying either game is gooseberry fool. Like I said some things are ok to just leave as people's opinion, other things most certainly are not.

What gets me are the people who think pretty much anything is a valid opinion and you can't say anything against that because its someone's opinion. That's just nonsense.

It is exactly the same, as it is a subjective, personal opinion.

We're so close to a breakthrough, but I'll try this again. Opinions cannot be valid or invalid as they cannot be tested objectively or empirically. That doesn't mean you can't disagree, challenge or try to change someone's opinion on something. Yours or my opinions are not wrong because they cannot also be 'right'; claiming that one opinion is right over another is insubstantial moral relativism. This is made all the more pointless when comparing two (gooseberry fool) football games.

I can't explain this any clearer and I think i've made my point, so any further replies will come in the form of egregious memeing and/or shitposting.

Glowy69 wrote:Hugo you cant have an opinion, tell the other person theirs is gooseberry fool and not expect to have yours criticised.

FWIW pro evo for me is better than SWOS, just because it is. But its Pro Evo 3 for me. Dem memories.

It totally depends on what the other opinion is.

I have no problem with you thinking Pro Evo is better than SWOS, its not the same thing as saying either game is gooseberry fool. Like I said some things are ok to just leave as people's opinion, other things most certainly are not.

What gets me are the people who think pretty much anything is a valid opinion and you can't say anything against that because its someone's opinion. That's just nonsense.

But if that person thinks its horse gooseberry fool then its a valid opinion, regardless of the games stature, it could be the best game ever, but someone, somewhere will not like it, in fact, they might hate it, and that is their opinion, whether its right or wrong is irrelevant.

Glowy69 wrote:Hugo you cant have an opinion, tell the other person theirs is gooseberry fool and not expect to have yours criticised.

FWIW pro evo for me is better than SWOS, just because it is. But its Pro Evo 3 for me. Dem memories.

It totally depends on what the other opinion is.

I have no problem with you thinking Pro Evo is better than SWOS, its not the same thing as saying either game is gooseberry fool. Like I said some things are ok to just leave as people's opinion, other things most certainly are not.

What gets me are the people who think pretty much anything is a valid opinion and you can't say anything against that because its someone's opinion. That's just nonsense.

But if that person thinks its horse gooseberry fool then its a valid opinion, regardless of the games stature, it could be the best game ever, but someone, somewhere will not like it, in fact, they might hate it, and that is their opinion, whether its right or wrong is irrelevant.

Trelliz wrote:Opinions cannot be valid or invalid as they cannot be tested objectively or empirically.

Except some things people count as opinions most definitely can be tested objectively and empirically.

Here there are a combination of factors, the relatively complex systems and their interactions could in theory be objectively or empirically measured and compared to other games, you could even perhaps argue its possible to measure the interaction of these systems with people to a certain degree.

Then you have a purely subjective reaction to these systems and someone's interaction with them.

I would argue that these two components are what goes into how people measure the quality of a game. This is the problem with suggesting that someone's opinion is purely their own subjective reaction to a game, because it isn't just that. Or at least the latter is significantly informed by the former.

As such you can say you don't like a game, because no matter how good the systems of the game are, if they aren't for you then they aren't for you.

But I would argue that in order for a game to be considered truly terrible or indeed gooseberry fool, then the systems would have to be objectively and empirically deficient.

Pedz wrote::idea: I guarantee that if you sit 100 People down to play this, who have never played it before, 90 of them would hate it, or think it's gooseberry fool.

Not sure about those numbers, but I can see where you are going with it.

Without context or explanation, perhaps I'd agree with that statement to a point...but I'd also say those people were wrong in their opinions about the game.

I think that a lot of games that are generally considered (by people who regularly play them) to be brilliant but are either a bit older or are difficult to get into would get the same reaction from people.

To some extent this applies to all of gaming, get people who've never played any games in their life to sit down with a controller in their hands and don't give them any instruction and a lot will probably come away thinking that they'd just wasted their time on something terrible.